Thus far, the last decade of 20th century America has been characterized by the senseless destruction of a country and over 300,000 of its inhabitants (Iraq), and the outrageous murder of human beings and destruction of nearly a billion dollars' worth of property by racists in Los Angeles. This is keeping with the rest of the century - the most atheistic and the most violent in human history.
In contrast, the first decades of America[1] were characterized by the drafting of legal penal codes which were taken verbatim from the Bible, such as the Body of Liberties adopted in 1641 by the Massachusetts Bay Colony, which explicitly provided that no law was to be prescribed contrary to the Word of God, and was annotated with appropriate Scripture references by John Cotton. Crime was low; the country prospered.
Sandwiched between these two contrasting decades is the Revolutionary War against Great Britain, which resulted in the formation of the United States of America as a rival "power." Our nation celebrates this event every Fourth of July.
The Declaration of Independence (published July 4, 1776) and the new Constitution (written a few years later) mark a repudiation of Biblical morality. They changed the official character of the nation from the evangelical to the materialistic, and thus created the selfish, violent nation we now live in.[2]
Which America was greater: that which existed on July 3, 1776, or the America of July 4, 1997? In our day taxes are ten times as great as they were in 1776, illiteracy is also about ten times as great (compare an 8th grade final exam from 1776 with an exam from today's public schools), and the State is incomparably more unGodly. Can anyone seriously maintain that America under George XI (or whoever the king might have been had we remained British) could have been any worse than America under Clinton I?
Clearly, what matters most is the virtue of the people. The system of government really doesn't matter at all. It certainly doesn't justify the killing that took place in the war that began July 4, 1776.
Many Christians are very patriotic, and support the Declaration of Independence and America's Revolutionary War for Independence. How can this be? The War for Independence was so plainly unBiblical.
Analyzing America's Declaration of Independence from a Biblical standpoint is an easy task. The following passages should be consulted:
Romans 12-13 / 1 Peter 2:13ff / Matthew 5:38ff / Luke 17:7-10 / Jude 8-10 / 2 Peter 2:10-12
An anachronistic translation follows for your convenience.
Then we can look at the Declaration of Independence.
Romans
12-13 {1} I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.1 Peter 2:11-24
Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul;Matthew 5:38-48
Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:Luke 17:7-10
And which of you, having a servant plowing or tending sheep, will say to him when he has come in from the field, "Come at once and sit down to eat"?2
Peter 2:10-12/Jude 8-10 But chiefly them that walk after the flesh in the lust of uncleanness, and despise government. Presumptuous are they, selfwilled, they are not afraid to speak evil of dignities.Proverbs 24:21
My son, fear the LORD and the king; Do not associate with those given to change; for their calamity will rise suddenly, and who knows the ruin those two can bring?Exodus 23:2
Thou shalt not follow a crowd to do evil.When, in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another,[3] and to assume, among the powers of the earth,[4] the separate and equal station to which the laws of nature and of nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator, with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life,[5] liberty,[6] and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men,[7] deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed;[8] that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it,[9] and to institute a new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.[10] Prudence, indeed, will dictate, that governments long established, should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves[11] by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute despotism,[12] it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government, and to provide new guards for their future security. Such as been the patient sufferance of these colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former systems of government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states.[13] To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.
[history of "repeated injuries and oppressions" omitted][14]
In every stage of these oppressions we have petitioned for redress in the most humble terms. Our repeated petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
Nor have we been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them, from time to time, of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us.[15] We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connexions and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity which denounces our separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, enemies in war,[16] in peace friends.
We, therefore, the representatives of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, in General Congress assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the name, and by authority of the good people of these colonies,[17] solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, FREE and INDEPENDENT STATES, they have full power to levy war, conclude peace, contract alliances, establish commerce, and to do all other acts and things which INDEPENDENT STATES may of right do.[18] And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of DIVINE PROVIDENCE, we mutually pledge to each other our lives, our fortunes, and our sacred honour.[19]
Readers' comments
-- You'll love 'em!CAUSE Home Page
Your comments make my day a delight,
even if you hate everything I write.
Kevin4VFT@aol.com
VINE & FIG TREE 12314 Palm Dr. #107 Desert Hot Springs, CA 92240
1.
It's fascinating the way our recent "bicentennial" erased nearly two centuries of prior Christian society. The Puritans were explicitly dedicated to making America a "city upon a hill," by concretely putting God's Law into effect. By saying America is only 200+ years old, instead of more like 400, Christian Theocratic history is sent down the "Orwellian Memory Hole." [Return to Text]2. America covenanted with God to be a "light to the world." America has instead shown a light of secularism and violence over the globe. A substantial proportion of the 200 million government-inflicted deaths in this century were capitalized by American financial and technological interests, with the approval of America's politicians. America's exports of weapons are substantially greater than her exports of Bibles. America has been a missionary for the wrong side. [Return to Text]
3. When does the Bible say it becomes "necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another"? (Romans 13, 1 Peter 2) [Return to Declaration]
4. Is it the Christian's goal to be "equal" with "the powers"? (Jude 8-10, 2 Peter 2:10-12, Ephesians 6:12, Romans 13) [Return to Declaration]
5. Do we have a "right to life"? (Romans 3:23; 6:23; 1 Peter 2:21; Luke 17:7-10) [Return to Declaration]
6. If we have a "right" to "liberty," why does the Bible command us to work for our slavemasters as if we were working for Christ Himself? (1 Corinthians 7:20,24; Ephesians 6:5-8; Colossians 3:22-24; 1 Timothy 6:1-11; Titus 2:9-10; 1 Peter 2:18-21) [Return to Declaration]
7. Are governments instituted by men? (Romans 13) [Return to Declaration]
8. According to the Constitution, the State has the power to tax, and to declare war. These powers are made "just" on the mere say-so of those who voted for the exercise of this "power to destroy"? According to the Bible, from Whom (or whence) do governments derive their "just powers"? [Return to Declaration]
9. Does the Bible say we have a right to "abolish" the State? Do slaves have a right to "abolish" their masters? Do children have a right to "abolish" their parents? (1 Peter 2) [Return to Declaration]
10. If we were instituting a new State, upon which principles should we build? [Return to Declaration]
11. If we are suffering under harsh masters or tyrants, does the Bible say we should "right ourselves"? (I Peter 2, Romans 12, Matthew 5) [Return to Declaration]
12. Scholars estimate that the total of taxes imposed by the British government upon the colonists was less than 5% of income. We are now taxed at a rate approaching 10 times that amount. Was the British government really the "absolute despotism" that warranted an armed revolution? [Return to Declaration]
13. Imagine a young man about 23 years old. As an agent of the British Empire, he wears a red coat. He believes that the colonies face a situation of "anarchy" and chaos. For generations, the British government has maintained law and order, and he has been told that this stability is threatened by lawless hoardes who vandalize tax-paying merchants while dressed as Indians. Based on reports of a large cache of arms in Lexington and threats of armed revolution, he has been sent away from his family in Liverpool to help maintain order in the colonies.
Oh dear. This nice young man has just had a large part of his face and shoulders blown away by the musket fire of an outraged tax-resister. This colonist (and others like him) apparently believed that this young soldier evinced "a design to reduce them under absolute despotism." As the officer lies dying in a pool of his own blood, the revolutionary "minute-man" rejoices in his victory over this red-coat's objective of the "establishment of an absolute tyranny over these states."
Is this a loving (1 Corinthians 13:5-7) or righteous (John 7:24; Exodus 23:2; Prov. 24:21) judgment of this young human being? Was this soldier a budding Adolph Hitler, or a "good Christian family man"?
Was this revolutionary killing the beginning, or the end, of a Christian nation? [Return to Declaration]
14. The Declaration of Independence lists many political acts which are said to justify armed revolution. Many of these abuses are rampant in our day, yet no one who waves a flag on the 4th of July is taking up arms to spill the blood of government agents. For example, scholars have estimated that the total tax required of the colonists by the British government amounted to about 3% of income. Today, the post-revolutionary government takes 30% of income each year, and up to 90% upon death.
If the killing of government agents was justifiable in 1776, why isn't it mandatory now? [Return to Declaration]
15. Did Nero have a "warrantable jurisdiction" over Jewish converts to Christ when the Apostle Paul penned his letter to the Romans? [Return to Declaration]
16. What is our duty toward our "enemies?" (Matthew 5; Romans 12; Luke 17) It is true that in the Old Testament God commanded His People to kill entire nations, which were idolatrous and made a public practice of committing capital crimes, such as infant sacrifice (Leviticus 18:24). These "Holy Wars" were a form of national capital punishment. Is there any such justification for war after the Priestly work of Christ? [Return to Declaration]
17. In Whose Name did the Apostles govern the early church? (Acts 4:7) [Return to Declaration]
18. Would the BATF or the FBI be alarmed if some sizeable Christian group declared that it had these powers: the power to levy war, contract alliance (with foreign nations), and challenge the authority of the Federal Reserve Board and the Interstate Commerce Commission? Is it any surprise that the British government was alarmed? If you were a king would you be alarmed at militias and revolutionary pamphleteers? If you were President what powers would you exercise if armed "extremists" threatened to declare their state a separate nation and exercise all those governmental powers? Did Jesus and His Apostles claim these powers? [Return to Declaration]
19. Is the Declaration of Independence a document that can be supported by a Christian committed to "submission to the powers" (Romans 13) and the "Ministry of Reconciliation" (2 Corinthians 5:17-21)? [Return to Declaration]
Theonomy comes from two Greek words, and means "God's Law." That shouldn't be too controversial, but it is -- for two reasons: (1) "Theonomists" believe God's Law is found even in the Old Testament; (2) God's Law does not leave "neutral zones" in which we can "be as gods" (Gen. 3:5) and decide for ourselves what constitutes good and evil. [Return to Beginning]
Americans are great for empty support of the American War for Independence. Many government officials are leary of such Christians taking the revolutionary rhetoric of the Founding Fathers too seriously. Some do: they store arms. Others don't: they claim to be followers of the Founders, who took up arms against a tax rate of less than 5%, but who do nothing in the face of the current rate ten times greater. The militia groups at least have consistency on their side, and the government is justified in worrying. Christians animated by Micah's Vine & Fig Tree vision are no such threat. [Return to Text]
| Subscribe to Vine & Fig Tree | |
| vft archive | Hosted by eGroups.com |
Vine & Fig Tree
12314 Palm Dr. #107
Desert Hot Springs, CA 92240
[e-mail to V&FT]
[V&FT Home Page]